From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pulcini v. Vogt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 25, 1978
64 A.D.2d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 1978)

Opinion

July 25, 1978


Proceeding commenced in this court pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review order of respondent Vogt, entered July 10, 1978, which disqualified attorney Stephen Herrick from further representation of petitioner, a witness, until final disposition of the criminal action in People v Keegan. Although it would appear that the subject order is of questionable validity in view of the informed consent to the representation arrangement by both petitioner and defendant Keegan (People v Gomberg, 38 N.Y.2d 307, 313-314), we are of the opinion that the error, if any, does not amount to a gross abuse of power requiring or permitting summary correction in a collateral proceeding (see, e.g., La Rocca v Lane, 37 N.Y.2d 575, 580). The petition, therefore, must be dismissed. Mahoney, P.J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Kane and Herlihy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Pulcini v. Vogt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 25, 1978
64 A.D.2d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 1978)
Case details for

Pulcini v. Vogt

Case Details

Full title:JACKIE S. PULCINI, Petitioner, v. FRANCIS J. VOGT, as Acting Supreme Court…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jul 25, 1978

Citations

64 A.D.2d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 1978)

Citing Cases

People v. Lincoln

As such, the motion to disqualify arose in the context of a criminal action ( see, Matter of Abrams [ John…